Friday, July 15, 2005

not so hidden agenda

John Podhoretz again said something on National Review Online "The Corner" and instead of linking to it and hoping you read it I will just quote it here..."Here is Joseph Wilson himself, talking to Wolf Blitzer on CNN today: "My wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her identity." Read that again. Now reflect on the fact that there has been an ongoing investigation FOR TWO YEARS conducted, we were breathlessly and rather constantly told in the weeks surrounding the initial controversy, on the basis that the White House and reporters OUTED A CLANDESTINE AGENT. Now we know. She wasn't. Not then.It is certainly possible, based on the poorly drafted wording of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982, to take this fact and still somehow to discern a crime somewhere here. Which is what Wilson's defenders and the blood-in-the-water Democrats and Leftists are arguing and will continue to argue."

3 Comments:

Anonymous said...

I noticed the title of that article. It's really sad to me that with someone dead, people still say, and I quote:"This surely qualifies as one of the "hey, big whoop" stories of all time."Whether a crime was committed or not, saying "big whoop" is in very poor taste.

CM--no one is dead. That's why this is a "hey no big whoop". A woman who used to work undercover in 1997, but very light cover, and that eeryone knew worked at the CIA, was mentioned by name by a journalist. She was in a photo spread for VANITY FAIR! She was not a covert op, her husband even admits it....

Valerie Plame's identity is dead. She can no longer do her job. Essentially, the whole episode is an act of espionage (might have spelled that wrong. I'm drunk).

From dictionary.com: Main Entry: es·pi·o·nagePronunciation: 'es-pE-&-"näzh, -"näj, -nijFunction: noun: the practice of gathering, transmitting, or losing through gross negligence information relating to the defense of the U.S. with the intent that or with reason to believe that the information will be used to the injury of the U.S. or the advantage of a foreign nation

I think that that about sums up anything I have to say about this. If I'm wrong, let me know. I might be. If I am, I will admit it, outright, and then remember to check my sources better. I believe that this is a wrongdoing. Nothing more, nothing less. If you disagree, then please let me know.